CreateDebate


Debate Info

52
48
I Agree I Disagree
Debate Score:100
Arguments:87
Total Votes:120
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 I Agree (37)
 
 I Disagree (34)

Debate Creator

PhxDemocrat(13120) pic



Death Penalty Gets Killed in CT

The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled today that the Death Penalty is unconstitutional.

 

Do you agree with their decision?

 

I Agree

Side Score: 52
VS.

I Disagree

Side Score: 48
1 point

The state of Connecticut has already decided they will no longer use the death penalty. Therefore, it would be cruel and unusual to use the death penalty on inmates who were sentenced before this ban was in place.

Side: I Agree

You made an excellent point. I think Connecticut made the right decision.

Side: I Agree
1 point

How come you only respond to posts on your debates?

Side: I Agree
ProLogos(2794) Disputed
2 points

Why must you torture and torment that innocent , kind hearted individual?!

Side: I Disagree
Troy8(2431) Disputed
1 point

Why do you never actually contribute anything?

Side: I Disagree
Cuaroc(8826) Clarified
1 point

I could ask you the same thing.

Side: I Agree
1 point

The killing has to stop somewhere. Advocating the death penalty, is advocating murder.

Side: I Agree
1 point

i've ALWAYS agreed that the death penalty was unconstitutional.

.

it is both cruel and unusual.

.

we are the only "civilized" country left on Earth that still uses it.

Side: I Agree
Cuaroc(8826) Disputed
1 point

we are the only "civilized" country left on Earth that still uses it.

No we aren't plenty of other "civilized" countries still use the death penalty.

Side: I Disagree
skyfish(276) Disputed
1 point

like these?

.

executions 2007-2012

CHINA THOUSANDS

IRAN 1,663

SAUDI ARABIA 423

IRAQ 256

UNITED STATES 220

PAKISTAN 171

YEMEN 152

KOREA (NORTH) 105

VIETNAM 58

LIBYA 39

amnesty international

.

sure there are.

Side: I Agree
1 point

The death penalty does not fit the legal standard of cruelty, and considering it has existed for the entirety of U.S. history, it is not in any way unusual. There is a reason that every attempt to rid ourselves of this barbaric practice through the federal courts has failed: because it is constitutional. That being said, it being constitutional obvious does not make it justifiable or moral. The reasons for outlawing the Death Penalty are extra-Constitutional (referring to the Constitution of the United States, not state constitutions), and the methods for outlawing it must be as well.

Edit: Oh, and the majority of humanity lives in countries where the Death Penalty is still permitted, so to call them "uncivilized" is incredibly arrogant.

Side: I Disagree
skyfish(276) Disputed
1 point

yeah, we are in GREAT company...

.

executions 2007-2012:

.

CHINA THOUSANDS

IRAN 1,663

SAUDI ARABIA 423

IRAQ 256

UNITED STATES 220

PAKISTAN 171

YEMEN 152

KOREA (NORTH) 105

VIETNAM 58

LIBYA 39

amnesty international

.

civilized... ha!

Side: I Agree

While I am an incredibly strong and vocal opponent of the Death Penalty, I find the legal arguments used by the court to be questionable at best.

The standard of "Cruel and Unusual Punishment" is not one that is generally effective when combating the Death Penalty, as one can perform it without a "cruel" method, and, statistically and historically speaking, it is far from unusual. While I agree with the court that "this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.", said argument does not hold significant legal weight. It is a very good reason for the legislature and the voters to oppose and rid us of said practice, but it seems questionable to me for a court to be using this justification.

That being said, the State Supreme Court was wise to clarify that this was done on state grounds, not federal grounds, as all attempts to appeal to the federal Cruel and Unusual Punishment standard have failed.

Side: I Disagree
1 point

It was my impression that lawmakers already banned the death penalty for new cases and the state Supreme Court was deciding that people currently on death row would be unconstitutionally executed. If that was the case, would you consider that unusual punishment?

Side: I Disagree
GenericName(3430) Clarified
1 point

I would consider the case unusual, but not the punishment itself.

Side: I Agree
skyfish(276) Disputed
1 point

one can perform it without a "cruel" method,

.

name ONE method.

.

just one, any one.

.

one that you think is not cruel when the result is death by definition.

Side: I Agree
Cuaroc(8826) Disputed
2 points

Anything that kills the person instantly.

Side: I Disagree
2 points

http://thelawdictionary.org/cruelty/

Cut the attitude and remember that I am strongly opposed to the death penalty. I put cruel in parentheses because I was referring to the legal standard of cruelty, not your or my concept of cruelty.

Side: I Disagree
1 point

The method that is not cruel is using our brains.

Side: I Agree

If someone committed a crime that terrible to get the death penalty they deserve it. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SOMEONE WHO COMMITTED MAJOR CRIMES! THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT GIVEN TO THOSE WHO COMMIT MEDIUM OR PETTY CRIMES!

Anyway we give the death penalty to those you torture, rape, kill, many many times in their life. While my argument seems petty to some liberals (You know you are) I believe that the death penalty should still exist.

Continuing:

I am a deep web explorer. I do it privately and tell others how bad our world really is and if you were to go there you would fine millions that deserve the death penalty. I once accidentally stumbled upon a web cam of a man taking out a woman's eye because the viewer payed her $500 dollars... Your telling me the death penalty is cruel... Then what do you call that...

Side: I Disagree
0 points

And what if the evidence was wrong, and the person executed was ultimately innocent? Do you truly believe that the justice system is infallible? Are the lives of innocent people really worth less than the desire for "revenge"?

Additionally, the death penalty is given out disproportionately to African Americans, and even more disproportionately to the lower class. This is not some even-handed sentence.

While my argument seems petty to some liberals (You know you are assholes

Of course they are going to seem petty when you are calling people who disagree with you assholes. You also sound immature.

Side: I Agree
1 point

I'm 13 BTW... And it is not in revenge, the man (or woman) does not deserve to live. We only give the death penalty to those who are do multiple crimes (multiple homocides etc) How do we get multiple people linked to one person and it be wrong.

Side: I Disagree
1 point

I'm going to put this very simple because I don't want people to misinterpret me. I disagree with taking a human life. It hurts to hear about anyone dying. If I we're a soldier I don't know if I could take the shot. But if this person takes a human life why should he/she get to keep his/hers. I think that people need to realize how the rape/murder victim families feel after words. What you are doing is giving that person who killed a moms little girl or raped 1 month old baby a comfortable life in prison where they have TV and visits.

Side: I Disagree
2 points

I assure you, murderers are not going to prisons where they get "TV" have any kind of visits you would like, or live a "comfortable" life. Additionally, if you disagree with taking a human life, why then do you advocate taking a human life as revenge for someone taking a human life?

Side: I Agree
1 point

I'm cheering on you man, give them common sense

Side: I Agree